********************************************************
NOTICE
********************************************************
This document was converted from Microsoft Word.
Content from the original version of the document such as
headers, footers, footnotes, endnotes, graphics, and page numbers
will not show up in this text version.
All text attributes such as bold, italic, underlining, etc. from the
original document will not show up in this text version.
Features of the original document layout such as
columns, tables, line and letter spacing, pagination, and margins
will not be preserved in the text version.
If you need the complete document, download the
Microsoft Word or Adobe Acrobat version.
*****************************************************************
STATEMENT OF COMMISSIONER MICHAEL J. COPPS,
DISSENTING
Re: Capstar TX Limited Partnership, licensee of
Stations WAVW(FM)(formerly WZZR(FM)), Stuart, Florida,
and WCZR(FM), Vero Beach, Florida, Notice of Apparent
Liability for Forfeiture
In this case, two Clear Channel radio stations aired
what was purportedly a couple engaging in sex and then
discussed sexual activities with them. Clear Channel has
been the subject of repeated indecency actions at the FCC,
accounting for well over half the indecency fines since
2000. Yet, notwithstanding the repeated nature of Clear
Channel's transgressions, the majority proposes a mere
$27,500 fine for each incident -- a ``cost of doing
business'' to a media giant like Clear Channel.
For repeat offenders as in this case, I believe the
Commission should have designated these cases for license
revocation hearings. As I recognized in a prior case, Clear
Channel has taken some steps in recent days to address
indecency on its stations. A hearing would have provided
the Commission with the ability to consider what actions the
stations took in response to these broadcasts and to decide
on the appropriate penalty.
I am discouraged that my colleagues would not join me
in taking a firm stand here against indecency on the
airwaves. The time has come for the Commission to send a
strong message that it is serious about enforcing the
indecency laws of our country.
Although I do not support this decision, I am pleased that
the Commission is proceeding in this case without a tape or
transcript. The complainant provided us with a description
of what was heard on the radio. The Commission has decided
that this description was sufficient for us to find that the
licensee broadcast indecency. I hope the Commission will
expressly and publicly overturn its general policy that a
complainant must provide a tape, transcript, or significant
excerpt of the programming at issue to support an indecency
complaint. I have long expressed the view that this
practice places an inordinate responsibility on the
complaining citizen and that it is the Commission's
responsibility to investigate complaints that the law has
been violated, not the citizen's responsibility to prove the
violations.